>> the next comet jimmy carter, bill clinton and al gore. trained three talks about what is a successful presidential

campaign. this is just over an hour. [applause] >> thank you. it's not and probably worse than adding to your resume, but it's a very important addition to what was said was that the most passionate, most interesting times i had for the 1976 and 1980 carter campaigns, where i was then the cambridge survey research, running all the analysis with john gorman of the partner patrick does on the plane and working with the speechwriters and a lot of my job was coordinated between sue eisenstadt and the policy people are speechwriters, while everyone else was running

around. and also in a team meeting at a surreal experience, which was i played ronald reagan with president carter before the debate. i'll explain later why this was an uncomfortable experience. not because who am i to play break-in, but you might think it's safe professors stream to create the president can say you haven't done well here or you're you're only can they get a b+ fare. alright you get an economy in the tank. it's the fact that it's very disconcerting to fluster the president. and everything that was idiosyncratic, hamilton or the

carter team for the president and over the years i realize and stranger discomfort of the debate dates was repeated with every president. and finally understanding that and what's different about being a president who is part of finally being able to put the pieces together and write a book about campaigns and candidates, not about how to just one win or lose, but what is it that have been over and over and campaigns that can help us to understand the future campaigns. i have the luxury of going back to the universities so that you weren't in perpetual motion with no time to digest what you have

done. it's summer in the fall and then you go back to being a real person, out of the pressure cooker. it's like being in the emergency room. it's all a journal an action. when i get back home i say what they think is going to have been never happened? won't matter that nobody expected to matter so you could start rethinking what matters in campaign. and then i had a very discombobulated experience, which was the gore campaign of 2000. entity that campaign after the energy and camaraderie of the clinton camp pain of 1992, which plan nmi on?

why is this so different? what can explain why one campaign and in the other campaign like a little league game or none of the other kids could catch or something and everything went wrong. and from day one, something seemed wrong. but i was in washington because my wife is in the state department in charge of china and bob squire, who later died of cancer during the campaign said he wanted me to be a fly on the wall within was great short memos they wrote in the carter campaign. and squire is a person that so much fun to be around because in washington east timor power struggle in washington you may see on the telephone when you're just doing the polling, even if you're just as important.

the first thing is that it's a little meeting every week to make the decisions. just 17 of us. i immediately knew something was wrong because anybody who's ever made decisions. there's a reason and no jury in the world is thicker than 12. that's already hard enough. the idea there were 17 seems to be run. from day one there was disarray. i read about it in the book. you have to decide why are you in this situation you're in and what secure? at the time in 1999, al gore has low polling numbers. mentors two ways to describe that. one is from your vice president and all vice presidents at that number so they get the nomination. the other waster victim of

monica lewinsky and the scandal has tainted you. now every professional says it takes time. don't worry. this shows the vice president. nobody knows who you are. the vice president court decided no, i'm fine. for the day of his announcement, later that day on the air in this interview with diane sawyer said the were disappointed fabry six times. and the whole story for the next week was gore separates from clinton. nothing more said about issues, presidency or what they stood for and made the news. and by making this statement then by the rush to judgment he was both disloyal and created friction in the white house between his staff in the clinton staff that got in the way of the

whole campaign. my first reaction was okay, i have to write about can pain. even before florida i thought this seems to be explained. how can so many stars be so crazy? there were a lot of really have people, but some things are wrong. but the strategists are one of the sequesters or maybe it was one of the foreign media people. there's a book that i had on my shelf by hagiographer and the theme of the book basically was that all maps are misleading and that is why they are useful. you buy a map to emphasize the features that you need to know about. the gasoline stations, the

monuments, the camping spot, places where the fish are running, fighting, where they two-year affair, whatever it is you're looking for, you don't want all the details. you don't want to know what the clothing stores are when you're looking looking for fish. so you need a map that is particular to what you're doing. but in a campaign, unlike with roadmaps are hunting maps are reaping the michelin guide to monuments in many countries, things change very quickly. and so, you realize how fast change, so you can't just talk about a good strategy that should start with. you couldn't possibly have a strategy that cover every team that could have been in the camp pain unless it was the size of an encyclopedia. they may make mistakes enemies

now, but then they changed the playbook or it may rain, but you can't compare it with me for possibly do or be so shallow. everything changes and there's only three reasons and campaigns to change. one is there's always new media with new information, more vulgar and more sophisticated that are coming around. everybody's always like the media revolution as if that was the newspaper, the telegraph, the radio, the television, cable, twitter, internet, facebook. there's always something that changes the game. it's only 1992, 20 years ago now that james carville became famous among the saints that made him famous was senate

campaign you haven't set any team until you've set it on tv. what's tv? using the internet? seeming facebook? may youtube? half of the students go on television. their eyes on this, i pass, all over the place. what is that got to do with it. there's so many ways to release information. joe biden got tweeted for press conference for the vice president from the obama supporters. it's a new world that way. it makes everything more difficult. ed rollins tried to make michele bachmann into a first-year candidate and complained after purity on fox after a hand grenade and raise a lot of little money fast and then you

never get serious because you keep throwing hand grenades and raise a little money. but if you want to be president, you've that go past the cute little thing. well, not only does that make the michele bachmann's of the world go for a while and further grenade and say outrageous things to keep them going for a week or two, it also makes art on the candidate try not to throw the grenades. you have to be able to do so many more it seems that the media. it's very prominent, very conservative and quite smart. a columnist in "the new york times" pointed out for conservatives, not just liberals. you can't defend your ideas on "the daily show," you're not ready to be president. that's one way things change fast. another ways you never can prepare for the issues that she

run-on and think it's going to stay that way. you run as a candidate and then there's 9-1-1. or think about john mccain. he decides he doesn't really like economics. he and nurse economics and its brilliant advisors and you're trying to prepare him to talk about economic spheres so instead, he emphasizes iraq. and then we had the collapse of the fall in 2008 and john mccain has to find a way to get in front of the parade and look like he's leading the show. so he gets the president to call a special meeting in washington and urges obama to call off campaigning sunday. secretary of the treasury, henry paulson wrote about the meeting and said mccain couldn't say a word. he didn't understand the three-page proposal.

he sat there as barney frank said looking at your old uncle and i got so frustrated that frank started yelling, where's your plan? would you want? became bushes mumbling because he didn't understand enough to take part. by the time the meeting ended, vice president cheney was laughing out loud at the meeting as senator mccain. and think about former governor romney of massachusetts. in 2009, he was perfectly positioned to be president obama as the moderate during the republican. he wrote an op-ed in "usa today" in the summer of 2009, saying, if you chop the public option from obamacare, you let the perfect massachusetts health plan for the country. a conservative cost-cutting plan. as we know, the public option

was strapped in the tea party when after everybody and now mitt romney is repudiating the plan that he said was the perfect plan for america. and when i saw all that, when i started putting that together, the new competition that's always occurred, new media, all the changes, you realize that during iraq, one of the stories in the "washington post" had a military phrase that just stuck with me every day when i was writing it. the phrase was, planning is everything in the plan is nothing. the plan is thrown out the first day and you realize if you're not planning all the time, you can't replan all the time. i have a secret confession to make. you have 15 seconds of the coach

should tell the quarterback what to do. you cannot have a debate and 15 seconds and you can't explain what you mean when you get the script to numbers like 40 wing left wider set thing. you have to know it and that takes a lot of work and you need a lot of time. think about senator mccain. he had a lot of economics have to explain to him his options, but hadn't paid attention to him he wasn't interested. he couldn't get it fast enough the way somebody who it really worked on it was. and so, it's the ability to plan in replan. when the competition changes, president carter filled a need nobody knew existed. 7061 and a lot of the old almost felt like it was unfair because the bitter, bitter divide the

democratic party was passing. something like 80% or 90% of white democrats in america oppose busing. and jimmy carter got blue-collar white votes and the african-american vote both in the primaries and that was the coalition had no udall and all the other liberals who are running against him. some of the other people almost solely to kick it both those. they hate each other. in traditional terms they did, but now someone who is a moderate governor but it's been very courageous acts like sound like nothing, but it was an awfully big event with a picture of martin luther king. you may call that symbolic politics, but that took a lot of courage and didn't feel like a symbolic act who followed reverend king when he did that.

and as i was looking all that over, i realize people are always saying the loser didn't have a chance. it was obvious this person was going to lose. once jimmy carter won, it was obvious the person who was 15 at the teen in 1975 would win. once it's over, it seems so obvious. that's why stay in the book every campaign has two winners. the inevitable winner when is so very. i wanted to explain the difference. remember 2011. who was the person who set the all-time record for high poll ratings, good price and fund raising and the republican party? america's mayor, time maxine's person of the year, rudolph giuliani endorsed by people like

rick perry, then governor of texas, pat robertson. they knew he was a catholic that was pro-choice, but they also said he is a culture who hate liberals and he can win and they put money on the line for an. he never made it. he just fizzled so badly. and out the way through 2011 with the experts at the national turnover, the expert of the national journal and political poll were asked for all the democratic candidate. who did better than did any surprise to be doing worse than it? worse than it was senator obama. better than expected with senator clinton. two days later she lost.

she blew it at the i/o chip or send jackson event. we have to understand there's a lot more contingency. as i started to work on the campaign, one of the first things i realized as this sounds awfully simple, but it's not. there really are only three campaigns. there is the challenger on the party out of power to capture the white house. and then there's either an incumbent trying to hold and defend the white house after four years for a successor trying to maintain control of the white house for the party in power. only three times in the last hundred years have we had senator mccain with that of vice president for senator mccain was the successor in

2008, but it's rare. so most of the time we have a challenger in a philosophical little bit about here. the public sees you differently whether you're an incumbent or challenger or successor. the different kinds of experience, whether they're in power or wanting power and their organizational challenges are very different. now when your star, when you're a challenger and in every case i learned, your last campaign, the one you think about what you're getting ready to run is always wrong. whether you've been a governor or senator or hero like an eisenhower or a major league giuliani, you are running a very different beast is very different media complications and it's much tougher and they all think they're ready.

in 1988, bill clinton said when i run, i'll never have any trouble with the drug questions. whatever they asked me about drugs all say he never broke any state laws. the first day you say that they'll ask you about england. first interview, governor clinton, what about when you were in england? and that's when the famous -- i didn't inhale answer was used. i don't know if you still remember that, but for years and years, you know, everything from yeah, i didn't inhale. over and over europe the line i didn't inhale.

he was having a terrible time with the question and answers. i'm not like these other people. i give both sides of the question and then i explained where i stand. as a professor, i realize the air against the professors. if you are a professor and you talked at length, either the kids get it or they fail. but when you are a candidate and you talked at length in the two now, you fail. it is your job to talk at the level that people want him he had to learn not to be the professor who wanted to show how much he knew, but the professor got to the point at the level the audience wanted arty for

chocolate or vanilla. essays. they want to know. it took them a long time to learn that. i called the section of the book about challengers, the search for next year's version. now, i understand there is a contradiction in that. but there is a contradiction in the dreams and hopes and aspirations we keep looking for in the next great promise. i used to call this, we're all looking for the great white hope. now i call it the knight in shining armor because the great white hope is african-american or a one-man, but it's the magical outsider who can come in and make it easy, this

untainted. and really, if you remember the old "star wars" movies, the perfect challenger would be owed a. wise, experienced, clean, not from washington. experienced at cleaning up a swamp, where his palace was a swamp, but also test. you have this image and everybody -- this is the trick in the campaign when you're challenger is to mix a little bit of the experience people want with some of the hope. the lines over time sound alike, but it's very hard in the end to do it. but if you look at the lines,

the things jimmy carter said in 1976 or jerry brown said for barack obama sat or gary hart said are virtually the same. you can cover up the name of the candidate at the table of the book and have a very hard time guessing which one. this isn't about me. this is about us. i am but an imperfect vessel for your hope. i can't even remember which of those is gary hart now one which is barack obama because they are very similar. but it's not easy to do that. and when they are planning in the camp pain -- when they run in the campaign against the incumbents come if they are a speed boat. they can move very fast. the ideal of the challenger's campaign and the movie everybody studies to this day is the war room, the documentary.

and there you've got the band of brothers off in the woods with robin hood or send thing and you are there in your take bunker and working the plan and policy people are right there. and whatever the president does before he's done with the speech, the attack is out there showing the contradictions between what he says now and what he said last year. you are out there zipping around react very quickly. it is sort of rapid reaction. and all they do is talk about plans and say when i run the show this would never happen. or is governor carter said on the way to becoming president carter, we deserve a government as good as the people. and the implication was when i'm president, the government will be as good as the people and is asking you to evaluate the hope and change against what you've got. and the challenger can always

look at what the incumbent has done and say, you didn't do a lot of what you promised. that class is barely half full and you promised the class would be overflowing. you promised whatever the employment rate is you promised last. whatever the inflation rate is, whatever the state of the war, you said you were to take care of these problems. always they point to things that didn't happen. and then james carville's famous phrase, whether the president likes it or not, they are always -- the incumbent is more of the same. and one challenger on the way at the white house said it must be so depressing in washington where a man's word is that worth

anything. that is governor bush in2000. can you imagine president bush saying some thing like that. i'm a texan so my word is always my word. it's a perpetual part of my hope and idealism that this time will be different. this time will be magical. it's a very tricky -- i'm not criticizing anybody who makes the promises because i do it when it works. you can't win if you don't make those promises because that's what people want. you be disappointed people if you didn't overpromise. promise the moon kind of thing and just make it sound of original when you do. and i learned a lot about how difficult it is to be an income that. at camp david when i played

reagan in the debates carter, it's a long story, but when somebody wrote about the debates 10 years later, after he wrote about it, but somehow persuaded them to give me a copy. i didn't look at them for three years because it's uncomfortable somebody you prepared to look in various. somebody who is uncomfortable, was flustered comest somebody respect, somebody with the nobel peace prize, somebody in camp david, somebody who had good years and bad years, that you are dedicated. and when i finally looked at them carefully, i was able to do so because i realize it's

common. i noticed over and over presidential campaign the same difficulty preparing. ..

and now know that for every difficult question there is an easy glibness one answer -- easy, a glib, long answer. it took me months when i finally listened to realize the extraordinary irony of the statements. president carter was criticizing challenger reagan for saying

exactly the same kind of thing as challenging carter had said. now the challenger carter realized how much harder it was to be president and some poorly prepared he and every other person were until it had been there for four years, he could not believe anybody should be allowed to get away with the same nonsense he get away with. [laughter] it is extraordinary. and so the challenger he -- the incumbent has to be in the position of saying, the glass is not empty either politics to me. and if you were president it would be a hole in the glass are some of the other be drinking from a and none of us would have anything. the incumbent is more like a. takes a lot of planning to make any move, and the moves were very slow. you make a very big waves. the gold standard of anything

any president can do is richard nixon's visit to china. nobody can criticize that on the left. once richard nixon -- the whole world. how many times as a presidential visit get out. >> reporter: how many times does a presidential visit change history and fascinate the world? and by doing it and allow president nixon to campaign on peace with honor against george mcgovern speech tomorrow. people, on average, preferred honorable piece than a few years to instant piece with dishonor. these big moves, the big moves the presidents have are really the veto. a president, when there is not a war and they're not commander-in-chief is whenever they campaigned as, the government. when i am president we will have

milk and honey. and i am president we will close guantanamo. when i am president will fix this problem. the truth this, if the senate since in the bill that he likes it takes 50 senators to pass. if he doesn't like it takes 67 to override him. so he is the 800 pounds senator, if you will, the 17 senator guerrilla, if you wanted. and i'll skip the successors because i have gone on longer than i was supposed to. i wanted to talk about obama today because he is really running the truman strategy of 1940 gatehouse which is the same as bill clinton 96 which is basically trying to paralyze and take away the operating space of the challenger by giving senators and congressmen from

that party the rope to tie the person not. tom dewey was not a stiff. he was a dynamic particulate dynamic governor and. :. he was an extraordinary speaker and a very, very smart impressive public figure. robert taft would prefer tom dewey to lose than to have a moderate internationalist take over the republican party. truman called on to have to pass some of tui's platform in the summer of 1948 and he made all sorts of arguments, if we do any of this it is letting the president usurp the power of the senate. what he really meant is, if i do this, i am accepting the fact that dooley is right and i'm wrong and now never be president. and that is a little bit when george stephanopoulos wrote about 1996 and their rabid

freshman became his best friend because the more they pushed on things the easier it was for clinton to look like the same balancing act against the others. and a skip over some wonderful details of that because the point i should have gotten to a few minutes ago is that the overlooked element that i emphasize that the book brings together for me is team work. what does it take to have a presidential team? they are all different. there is not a formula. you cannot rent the team. every president needs different pieces. you can't just hire them into quickly. the only people who run for president are truly audacious. you really have to be bold and feisty and have a lot of brass

if you're on the stand up and say ready to be the most powerful person in the world. and you're not, and your knowledge, but you have to act like you believe it. and you have to get out. udall said announce you're running and it is like in the old westerns when you walk in the saloon and elected you like you're the new gun in town. who are you to say you're the fastest gun in the west? and you claim that. if you are a senator, all the other senators, who does he think he is. if you've been around senators and the president's speech they all say, i would have been better. [laughter] >> you know. and it's like that every minute with the governors, to. now, how do you plan that you are ready to run the world and keep learning all the same about things you don't really know. that's not easy. you have to be able to the edge of.

you can't be at desiccated if you don't know which stand for. you also can't be edge out without a team because you're going to be asked by -- president carter got some very difficult situations when he was asked what he thought was very simple questions. one was, do you think your human rights stand applies to northern ireland to mcentee said, of course, not knowing that at that point he accepted the ira proposal against a proposal of moynihan and hugh carey, the governor of new york, and prompted emergency cabinet meetings in ireland and london a week before the election and only richard holbrooke on the phone for 48 hours saved the presence bacon by convincing them that it was a mistake and that he was going to win anyway. if they announced and there would be sorry. you need the whole book. and to be resilient you need this confidence when you go out every day that you're doing it

perfectly. you know exactly what you're going to do. you're obviously going to fall flat on your keister some days. you're obviously going to make huge mistakes. the team has to be ready. it's the world according to mike tyson, the boxer. when reporters when asked tyson about the opponent's strategy. the opponents is there going to begin by doing this or by doing that. he'd say, well, everybody has a strategy until they get hit in the face. [laughter] it's the campaigns job to be ready so that when you're hit in the face they know they have a bucket of water or a contingency plan. and also, to prevent ambushes that you don't want and to help you decide what fights to what. you can't go out there just acting like all of here to do is bite and not everybody down because that's a disaster to the team has to understand the difference between the three campaigns.

then the two most astonishingly difficult things to have on the team? one of them is a really strong chief of staff that's a real pure decanted it. why is that important? without a strong chief of staff you don't give closure. everybody always wants to go behind the chiefs back until the candidate, really you want to talk more about the euro orillia to the spin more time in missouri or really gave rights a bigger issue than they understand. there's always somebody who has a stake. it's of little bit like trying to referee budget fights between the army, navy, air force commander marines over who should get the money. that has to be done with the kendis is on the road 18 hours a day. that can only be done when there's a strong chief, and it only can be done if there is

somebody who is close to the family that's in the inner circle of the campaign and knows the canada. at first i didn't appreciate why mr. crowe was important in the campaigns. he seemed like a kindly, gentlemen. but there were times when the president would make a mistake. if he said, jimmy, this is upsetting people, the president would understand, it's not just that the speech writer is upset for the issue person is upset, i need to do something. that's a very important thing. a person that turns out to have been brilliant at it despite the vicious -- despite how vicious press was? are you ready to nancy reagan. the great richard news that, the best presidential scholar of the last century told the

interviewers at the miller center for the presidency at the university of virginia, as to is the nancy when you interview from any white house. the person who watches their presence back it takes care of them. it's not always the life. there is somebody who watches the. that's the only time you can adapt and keep things in order. now, people say today this long process, longer than it used to be and less good than it used to be, i don't like all the money any more than most people. i don't think -- i think it's like an arms race. we could stop a dozen of their weapons as opposed the stoppage of. we can enforce the treaty. the pile on the billions on the side the public -- it's a longer process that used to be. it's a longer public process.

eugene mccarthy started campaigning to be a nominee in 1960 and then decided in 1968 to be the reluctant nominee who had never wanted to run. john kennedy spent years first trying to get to be vice-president in 56 and in planning. people have always started running the day they get that clean and dry. they don't stop until the can't run anymore. and the difference is now in its public. at think it works better than the smoke-filled rooms not because we are smarter than the boss's but because this public, long process gives people more time to show how often they are. it gives more time for the candid it's to go at each other and bush. it's a better process the way that never used to be. i'm sorry i did get to have another hour, but on given the

signals to be polite because there's always some any questions at the carter library. [applause] >> have a great opportunity to ask questions to someone who really knows about politics. they couldn't be a better time when the presidential campaign to raise your hand, be recognized and be ready for the microphone to come over. >> have you given copies of the book -- >> what is ben the feedback? >> i give a copy of one candid it. and not going to break the non-partisan atmosphere. another both have it. i didn't give it to both.

>> the feedback, have you noticed any feedback? >> very positive. [laughter] i don't know that it matters. if i did and said so i'd never be listened to again. my generation, if you help you don't say much about it the longest term. it's a book that sets patterns. it does not make it necessarily easier to do things, but it makes it easier for us to understand what is happening, i think. it's quite an act. >> would give a shot. >> i worked on a lot of local campaigns, managing campaigns.

can you explain the power of incumbency and how, even if it's not logical the whole saying where i hate congress, but i love my congressman. >> part of it is the old -- really transferred. i call the chapter on incumbents regicide or more of the same. it's a big step to knock off that person. it's a lot harder, especially when there the executive. easier to get mad at a counselor over something because that is the messenger. if you're the mayor, police chief, sheriff, governor, president, there's a certain presumption. look, whatever people say about president obama, even the people who don't believe he was on this planet, nobody says it has been another september 11th for 4

years. no dan in america has burst. new orleans is no worse today than when he took office. the things in not paying attention to weren't so bad, even if you hated in. so there's a certain -- and when you're elected, maybe 15 percent of the people in the country haven't focused on you enough to know whether they are positive or negative about you. over the four years that level of uncertainty diminishes. after four years a lot more people are aware of you. there's a very important change. people think about the incumbent in terms of what it done. you have something more solid. he did this in the promises that . it is the bird in hand into in the bush problem. what is it that helps the bird you've got look better than the

promise of magic change? that's the trick of the game, and that's why reading the book, you start to perform a. they're and then right there. i see both of you. i saw you too. >> how do -- how did the obama's decide to come out when they did , how they make the decision to come out for gay marriage in this particular point in the campaign? >> and think they almost -- the only thing -- i was asked -- okay. i was asked about it in the york four days before that. i said one thing. i am certain there will -- you will come out before the conventions so there won't be protest. i don't think either campaign understeered what was going to

happen when he made the statement. i didn't think i'd ever see the day when a republican candidate for president accused the democrats of a smokescreen by talking about social issues. and we know it's been one of the fastest changing issues in america, and that's something that has been true for a long time. it suddenly has a default so that you cannot take a strong position and win everywhere. the have to have a nuanced position or a state position. this is happening so fast, it's all a gamble. that's another example of how much harder it is as the incumbent. his basketball body already came out for a. the secretary of education, you can't put people in the basement of a closet and wipe them out the way you can when your challenger. you have people in the cabinet. you try quieting henry kissinger

you tell somebody who's career depends on the funding that the addition to the more. i think the shock to me was how fast neither party wants to make a big fuss about it . but none of that explains why they did it. he had no choice to do it at some points. obviously the timing was affected in part by a vice-president biden. i thought that was almost as funny as this month string comment. and no basketball players went skiing. right there. >> he spoke a little bit about the similarities as strategies between campaign for the republican primary. this seemed to be a lot of negative campaigning. i wonder if you could speak a little bit on the trans. >> just remind you, the

democratic campaign of 1992 and 1972. [laughter] >> yes. okay. when you have the chance of winning if you're george w. bush , if you're bill clinton, if your mitt romney, the trick is you need 40 percent of the country to lead you to get through your primary. the right 40 or the left 40 or the 30%. the trick is when the primary without doing things that make it harder to get to 50. mitt romney was determined to do nothing to move farther than the right and necessary. unlike george w. bush in 2000 bill clinton in 1992 or governor carter in 1996, his challengers were on the right not in the center. bill clinton did not have to

move to left to be people. george w. bush had challengers. john mccain on the left of him. steve forbes decided to be haven not be the right wing minutes he had been. so mitt romney, unlike many other kennett's was faced with far more virulent challenges sucking out delegates in the votes and pockets. none of them could never win. they all did things that probably -- i'm not sure, but i suspect there was some week planning that nobody expected. i'm certain nobody expected it would have to come out and condemned contraception on the way to the nomination. i don't think he wanted to go as far as he did to endorsing congressman ryan and some of the others. when you're facing michele bachmann and newt gingrich and

sarah palin and didn't have to run scared you will have a hard time finding room. if i can -- the fed thinking made one mistake, nobody likes to be told vote for me because i can win even if she go with let me. that some of what he ended up with even though he has a very smart teams around and. wait for the boom to drop. >> interesting point that the process is not water now which is seen to. more public. and in your opinion as the process become more or less sensitive over the years and part two of that would be how

would you or would you advise people not to become very cynical and jaded by the process given the discourse that goes on? >> i can't answer the second half, and not gone to try. the first half is, there is some much more substance it's stunning. john kennedy traveled the country but to people. he goes to the book to show he had intellectual chops that ted sorensen really wrote most of why england slept. he could do enough to get through the campaign and he's very smart, well read. now you just don't have it take, you have to be able to do the sound bite, the third sound bite, the fourth sound bite. governor bush spent a year meeting every weekend in texas with an economic team. rice literally camped in texas, resigned as provost at stanford

and moved to texas to work with him on national security. they had weekly meetings. in some much more rigorous job. look at the people who get screened. michele bachmann never did explain what she would do other than repeal everything he ever did. and then there is governor groups who, you know, he had some great lines. and it worked great as rally, cheering points for his devoted, but he can go on and explain the many land. you have to have a lot more depth. there's a lot more harder than the 302nd sound bite. as i learned and i only got three-quarters of the way through my talk really knowing how to keep it on time and not talk too much your inner when senator obama realize that to be present, he had to quit

love eating in showing how much in new, it's hard to be precise and to know enough senator mccain with the three page memo that everybody had for the big summit. he said he hadn't had time to read it. on go to my grave believing he read it and didn't have a clue about it because he hadn't paid attention of the years. no disrespect. a great hero, but i don't believe he could understand it without all lot of -- i certainly couldn't today with a ph.d. from mit. i still don't understand some of these derivatives and swaps and problems that have to know about if your president you have to sit in the room with larry summers and bob rubin both of whom are too smart to fail and decide which of them is right, and they're both determined they're going to win every argument. is not enough to have a nobel laureate understaffed. you have to have a couple, and

you have to decide which one is right. probably easier if he stand. >> well, who would you say in your estimation had campaigns with the greatest reputation that had the biggest problems tonight maybe it was the fact that the other campaign imploded of something like that. which gets more high reputation that they deserve in your estimation? >> i think too much credit might be given to the vice-president. well, that's a hard one. people usually has me who was a great loser. a think the best -- one of the best campaign is a loser -- well, you might say president carter in '76 because he was 40 points ahead and won by about 25,000 votes and a few states

because the ford campaign about the way day by day by day the whole campaign. that was a very, very good campaign. you might say the do the campaign because given how many things that taft did to sabotage him and all the obstacles german throughout the almost pulled off there's a lot of campaigns -- it's a hard question. and need a better answer, and i'm sorry. sir. >> what do you anticipate -- you already seen some of it in 2010 about the citizens united decision allowing huge amounts of unknown money to come in and make all these attacks. there's no way to really respond and you don't know who's making the tax. >> i think the fact that they are going to have to say who the donors were is going to make a difference. i read on the way here preparing

my talk i saw a headline of one of the big super pak funders was complaining. you're making as subject to criticism after being -- exercising our first amendment rights. it's very interesting how fast some of these people will back off. i think also, that old cars, be careful what you wish for because you might it. at think this is the year they do this much damage to their friends as help. i don't think -- the person who week to the idea of going after obama on racism and the rev. right now that he's president, i don't think that person was really as interested in helping governor romney as they work in making themselves and name as the new swift boat superstar fishes a person who can attract

money from people who will believe anything and nothing is a virulent enough. that doesn't help you get to 50%. that's one of the tricks. and this is the year the "wall street journal" complained about some of the debates and how they were hurting the republicans because you had the one way food a gay soldier. there was one word they dealt let him die about a person without insurance. there was the one where they cheered governor perry for the number of death penalties. these are not -- the red, need, small groups, it felt like the democrats in the 70's. you wonder when somebody will do with the democratic conference did and organize moderates to bring the party back into some balance. maybe it'll never happen because of the money, but i keep thinking there's hole in the

political spectrum for the old-fashioned moderate conservative republicans who took a little governments seriously. >> in your three types of campaigns, is there any pattern as to which type of campaign is better to use substance then use more? >> they all need substance in the end. because even -- the incumbent campaign has to be based on some of the substance of what they done in the big moves. the challenger can go beyond a lot of smoke and mirrors and cheap talk. in your record. i don't think people understand. bill clinton was famous in the '92 campaign for the sister soldier even where he made it

clear that he was determined enough to of building a multiracial coalition. he would criticize violence have pop lyrics. he had given speeches like that during the campaign, but nobody took him seriously because of all the, i didn't inhale, maintain my ability, and all sorts of remarks that have made him look like when somebody said a person whose favorite color was plaid. one day during the campaign, one day during the campaign he gave a very tough speech about the need to change behavior and a black church. the went to a white church in detroit. the white church, the famous ex democratic reagan democrat. anyone to a big african-american church in detroit. you're going to get them together again. were going to work together.

both sides a going to have to change some policies. the number the details, but it was very powerful. until he made it clear he minted by taking a chance and sticking his neck, line the press with and listen. then he could talk about the policies in arkansas. when president bush one to say he's just a tax raising liberal like all the other democrats, he could point out what he had done to find jobs for people on welfare. when it wanted to say, you're another person looks the other way on crime because you don't want to be accused of being hard on blacks and the civil liberties union he said, look what we're doing in arkansas in a fight crime. he had policies, and he could talk about the. it takes a lot -- it takes years and years to have the ability to

go beyond a one liner. i used to think in a campaign all you needed was a take. if you want to be governor, here are five things to say. the third most important congressman in the republican party. as me about foreign policy. and make some insulting comments about france and of the next question. that doesn't work anymore when you want to be president. you have to know a lot more. you see the mistakes president -- governor running mate when he spoke too soon on afghanistan and a few others. you have to really develop your timing and of contents. >> and going to take a privilege. i want you to have an opportunity to pick up the book and get it signed. under last the last question. it is, what do we expect to see in the months ahead? the campaign. what should we look for and what do you think is going to happen?

>> i think there are two very important events coming for governor romney to look for. what does he do for a vice president? the vice-president will tell you where they think he's week and where they think obama's week. what is the problem they expect the vice-president to solve? there is no perfect vice-president for all seasons, all issues, all the candidates. what is it they see as their best option? the other one is, what did they do with senator santorum to have a sane, moderate convention and not a religious revival that panned president bush to the right in 1992. when your buying -- dying three

year-old daughter is mental life member of the nra and when -- nobody can do as well as senator santorum did this year without thinking that should governor romney lives there would be the nominee. realistic and not, but i'll bet every penny i have that he thinks he could get a nomination certainly he thinks he's a very important leader of a part of the party and he can only stay a leader of that part of the party if he pushes to show he once those issues kept alive. i'm not sure governor romney really wants senator santorum as bread and butter issues discussed very much this year. and don't know how they're going to finesse that. they have a very easy time with ron paul, congressman paul

because his son is a senator. there is not much ron paul can do to be tough without giving his son and. >> to have policies that are irrelevant to the country are the work for industries or for everybody. how does he point out very

carefully that they started out. you're a better massachusetts than anybody else. what you think he bettors' president's those of the two big move spirit is not about the debates and the maenads and your mother was no better than my mother. your unicorn and i'm an african. there's all the silliness. the silliness is fun. answer the question, some of the silliness, some of it -- somebody up there likes every bit of the silliness that you can stand. i have my own varieties. my dream in life is to have john stuart available. why did he take vacations? it's not fair. thank you. >> the fascinating evening. one of the reviewers said this is the book you want to keep if you enjoy politics. this is a book you want to keep by your bedside.

it have an opportunity to buy the book in the lobby. born to be signing them. let's give him a round of applause. this is a wonderful evening. thank you. >> book tv has over 150,000 twitter followers. follow book tv on twitter to get publishing news, scheduling of its, author information, and talk directly with authors during our live programming. twitter.com/booktv. >> well, there is a new exhibit at the library of congress called books that shaped america. book tv is taking a tour of that exhibit. joining us is roberta schaefer, associate librarian for the library of congress. ms. schaffer, why do you call it books that shaped america. >> we actually call it books of -- books that shaped america as

opposed to some of the other words with considered light changed america because we think the book's slowly have an impact on american society. shaped seemed to be the better word to imply that kind of connotation. >> when you think of the word shapen what you just said, what book in this exhibit comes to mind? >> actually, that is the fabulous part of this exhibit. no one book is shaping america. so many books have had a profound influence on american culture and society and, indeed, the very essence of what america's. it would be impossible and it really would be improper to it to -- take one book from the 88 in a year. >> eighty-eight books. the exhibit starts out with common sense. >> yes, it does. although, the earliest book is actually ben franklin's book, electricity. that is as 1751. so we have two books about common sense in the show. one is dr. spock's book on raising your child in a

common-sense way. of course, thomas paine's book that really kind of spark or shaped the american revolution. >> when we see these books, these of first editions, very rare? >> they're not all first editions were very rare, although we had many books and art collection, are library of congress collection that would be first editions in very rare if not one-of-a-kind. we selected books for a variety of reasons. some of them have inscriptions by other famous people or by the authors themselves. two books in this collection that i just adore of books that are part of the armed service lookout reached the people who are serving in the military. we have two examples of books that soldiers, i believe now there are senseless to read that the war front. at least in the olden days. >> one of the two books? >> i believe one of them is tarzan. i'm trying to thing now with the

of the oneness. oh, my goodness. >> love you think of that, in this exhibit, a lot of novels. >> yes. the novels are critical part of american culture. got all the fun novels that people read, the common people read, but some very highbrow and very complex novels. some that appeal to people of all ages. some children's books that appeal to people of all ages. the was a vase, charlotte's web, hardly really limited to just the children's audience. >> out of those books shape america. >> many of them identified who we were becoming for the aspirations we had as a nation. others told about experiences that we had uniquely as americans like the diary of lewis and clark really others to find the dialect.

huckleberry finn. talk in dialect. there really shaped not only our ideas, but how we think today. >> you also have some social, cultural books. once asked about those. you mentioned dr. spock. a couple of cookbooks and this collection. a book called the big book, alcoholics anonymous. >> we also felt that it was very important to look good nonfiction and books that either were self-help or kind of book barriers of certain kinds. so we looked across the broad spectrum of books that shaped america. we did not want to limit ourselves to a particular genre or a particular kind of book or even a certain kind of offer were writing style. and we looked through many books that were innovative. that kind of showed america as an innovative country, as a country that looked for practical solutions, shared her experiences broadly, used books

and stories to inspire going to the frontier. that could be literally or intellectually. >> here at the library of congress now cochairperson which is really interesting. we had a number of discussions as people brought forth titles. believe it and not it was not all that difficult to select these books. i think as you implied, this is not a definitive list. there is no article the books that shaped america. we really decided, we want to do was choose books that would get america talking about them. that was not as difficult to find consensus on this may be choosing 50 bucks or 100 books.

so we did need a chair person. >> some of the books have created social movements. ida tarbell, upton sinclair, rachael carson. >> one of the interesting things about many of the books here are that they not only created social movements, but some even lead to legislation. so we see that the jungle in here, and we know that it really created the forerunner legislation to the food and drug a ministration being created. so not only social movements, but actually legislation, social change. >> why 88? >> eighty-eight is really just where we decided to stop. we were worried about using a number that is commonly associated with a definitive list. we avoided ten, 25, and 100. beyond that it was kind of up for grabs. and we get to 88 we said we think that's a good number. it won't give anybody the impression that we mean this is

the 88. >> poetry, religious books? >> quite a few. running the span of two centuries. will whitman. we really try to be very clear the poetry has been an impressive part of america's history and that americans have been very committed to writing and reading poetry. i think that continues today. >> we do have a holographic bottle. a lot of the books, while they wouldn't necessarily be associated with their religion have a moralistic or kind of do good tone to the. the relief of the small representative of america. we try to look at the values,

her spiritual sort of personal rather than looking a particular religious books. >> roberta schaefer, had a jacket your start here? >> oh, my goodness. i started here over 30 years ago as the first special assistant to the law library. fairly fresh out of law school. i absolutely fell in love with the library of congress. thirty plus years ago you cannot keep . i run to work every morning. i think working here and being here surrounded by books, manuscripts, musical scores, movies, the whole gamut of what really is knowledge in america is such a thrill in such a privilege that you really are going to have trouble getting me to retire. >> is this exhibit open to the public and how long? >> it's entirely open to the public and will be through the end of september.

let's say you can't come to washington. we have a virtual version of our exhibit on our website. part of this exhibit, part of this conversation is an open website where we are asking people from all over the world to comment on the books we have selected but also to tell us why you think something we selected should not be on our list and even more important, why something you think should be on the list should be added to the list. we want to hear from you. so far we've heard from over 5,000 people. we encourage everybody to go to our website, loc.gov/bookfest, and you will find the list of books. you'll also find the opportunity to complete a very, very brief form telling us what you think of the books and what should be on the list. >> roberta schaefer, last but you have in here was published

in 2002. >> yes, we kind of decided to put a cut out on it. we're really going to be looking at books that shaped america. we have to give them an opportunity, give books and opportunity to prove their worth and shipping america. this is an organic endeavor by the library of congress. we intend to keep looking at books that keeping america. we thought, about a decade, that's a good place to stop. since we are in 2012 now, let's stop at 2002 and keep revisiting it. >> the later books that you have in your, the band played on, 1987, cesar chavez, 2002. >> yes. they are. of course, having influence. we talked about that earlier. aids research and really sort of raising our consciousness about the terrible disease. cesar chavez, of course, a leading voice of farm workers, but really a leading voice of america. >> roberta schaefer, these books in the exhibit, where the best

sellers in their time? >> many of them work, and actually, many of them continue to be and have not on the print. even though that wasn't a specific criteria, so many of them have been translated and carried american ideals across the world. >> zero one to ask you about one of the specific book, emily dickinson's book of poetry. >> well, of course. amelie dickenson is a must have american pot. the particular book that we have here in the show is an art book done by a cooperative in cuba. they have reproduced the book of poetry, and they have also made a facsimile and a little tree. it is made of recycled material. emily dickinson, of course, is a phenomenal polish, but we really didn't know about her or discover her until the mid-1950s when we finally were able to see her poems or read her palms and love her palms unedited and in

no way. >> it was during the editing? >> as professional editors like to take the pen and ink to conform. for amelie of all people that was an artful restriction. >> roberta shephard, books that shaped america is the name of the exhibit. library of congress look at it at first and independence avenue in washington d.c. right across from the nation's capital. >> well you seen the exhibit "books that shaped america," if you would like to join our chat room and talk with reporters schaefer about these books and get your input on what books he think should be included e-mail us at booktv.org. >> what are you reading this summer? book tv lost no. >> and reading a book called values to action by kramer. the professor at kellogg school of business. a wonderful book.

a recommended highly. i just finished reading a book called currency wars. that can render its author. it's about international economics and what is happening to us. finally, i just finished a book called unaccountable which will be released in september written by marty carry his one of the leading surgeons at johns hopkins hospital. >> for more permission on this and other summer reading less visit. ♪ team [background noises] [background noises] [background noises]

[background noises] [background noises] at a time. [background noises] [background noises] >> ladies and gentlemen, chief executive of the hachette book group.

always difficult to tame a crowd of publishers. it's my great pleasure to welcome you to the 175th year celebration for the wonderful little, brown & co. to celebrate 175 years of great authors, great books command great publishing is really absolutely something special. i hope you are all enjoying the party so far. it's great that this evening we are having their room not only wonderful authors but we are joined by our bookselling partners, literary agents, the media, and publishers to help spread the great word. we also have in the room many, many of my colleagues from

little, brown & co. past and present. it's fabulous that you're all here. there a fantastic team of committed, creative people. well, the importance of storytelling and a great ride. i think -- absolutely exemplifies the very top publishing and is led by michael peach who will now -- [applause] who will now continue. [inaudible conversations] >> hello. thank you for being here tonight. i'm so happy. [laughter]

it was in 1837 went to booksellers decided that there was more when they could print and sell instead of just sell them themselves. here we are nearly two centuries later, this wonderful, a labyrinth get together with publishers, writers, literary agents, booksellers, producers, librarians. 175 years have been ruled by a succession and gentlemen to my family, employees. it's now on by the second-largest book publishing enterprise in the world whose books and even older than ours. under all these aegis is the publishing company called little, brown & co. has persisted in every evolving

group of writers and people interested by those riders with pinning their books in the world . this simple thanks to the writers to trust their books to us without which the company would not have made it past the civil war . many of them are here tonight. emily dickinson. amelie? [laughter] [inaudible conversations] what a joy to work with these writers, an extraordinary admiration and gratitude we have for them.

[laughter] i want to think a few people have been essential. is very happy moment. ..